Unregistered, as a new member your first 5 posts will be subject to moderation.
So if your post is submitted successfully, but does not show up immediately, please be patient, as it may take some time for a moderator to approve it.
Please don't double post.

Rather than Man being by nature either polyamorous or monogamous, I imagine him as being polygynous, or in the case of females, polyandrous. That men had an evolutionary desire to spread their seed to as many women as possible, while at the same time, women wanted as many protectors for themselves and their young. Of course, men saw other men as competition for mates, just as females viewed other females as competition.

It goes without saying that you can't have a society that both polygynous and polyandrous, because someone is always on the losing end of it. This will always lead to cheating.

So you have a choice.

You form a polyamorous society, in which men have to accept the reality they don't know if they fathered any children. Or you form a monogamous one, in which they do. I think that latter prevailed because the males of the species need to be certain that they fathered the next generation.

These days I see poly vs mono more in terms of love/lust vs jealousy. If you allow yourself to love others, then by default, you exposed yourself to jealousy. You must then learn to control the jealousy. Alternatively, you can try to prevent any jealousy , but only the expense of giving up multiple partners. However, in this case, you must learn to control the lust.

You form a polyamorous society, in which men have to accept the reality they don't know if they fathered any children. Or you form a monogamous one, in which they do. I think that latter prevailed because the males of the species need to be certain that they fathered the next generation.

[/B].

That's an interesting theory. It also predates modern history or even medieval history in that lineage has often been tied to inheritance and positions of authority...think royalty, kings, chieftains and such. I'm certainly not saying that all cultures practiced that but a lot of the more historically influential ones certainly have.

Thanks for sharing that

__________________
Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

This theory is rather thoroughly explored in Sex at Dawn. Of course it began long before medieval times. It's quite obvious in the Bible for example, especially the Old Testament, in the laws, and in the historical books where patriarchal Yahwist tribal lords strove so mightily and violently to overthrow goddess worshipers (Asherah and Astarte).

For more help at reading between the poetically politically slanted lines in the Old Testament, read When God Was a Woman, and The Hebrew Goddess, both scholarly books.

__________________Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place. --Shaw

me: Mags, female, pansexual, 59, loving and living with
miss pixi, female, pansexual, 37
I am in a somewhat new relationship with Luka

Well that's the monogamist mindset. We all fantasize about fucking attractive people we see, while staying blissfully in love/lust with our faithful SOs.

Successful poly people, OTOH, get lots of vicarious pleasure (compersion) out of their partners' other romantic/sexual relations.

__________________Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place. --Shaw

me: Mags, female, pansexual, 59, loving and living with
miss pixi, female, pansexual, 37
I am in a somewhat new relationship with Luka